• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

DS9 in 2013

DS9forever

Commodore
Commodore
From an interview on Star Trek.com with David R. George III:

"It is my belief, though, that other works will continue the Deep Space Nine story, especially since 2013 marks the twentieth anniversary of the show’s premiere. It’s also entirely possible that I’ll be the one to do that".
 
Yeah, but it's promoted as TNG, so I doubt they'll do it for the DS9 anniversary.
 
Well, we can probably expect about 3 DS9 books in 2013, based on how many TNG books will be released this year, for TNG's 25th Anniversary.
 
I hope they do a better anniversary project for DS9 than Slings and Arrows. While I really enjoyed it, 4/6 stories in that novella set are about a DS9 plot point or are actually set on DS9. It was a little weird.
 
I hope they do a better anniversary project for DS9 than Slings and Arrows. While I really enjoyed it, 4/6 stories in that novella set are about a DS9 plot point or are actually set on DS9. It was a little weird.

I assume you mean it was weird for a TNG anniversary project to center on DS9, not that you have a problem with the idea of S&A itself as a DS9-anniversary reprint.

But it's not that weird, considering. S&A was about showing the first year of the Enterprise-E, and that year happened during DS9's run, so it was DS9 that defined what was happening in the Alpha (and Beta) Quadrant at the time. And that included things that would've logically affected the Enterprise, like the pervasive Changeling/Dominion threat and Lwaxana's pregnancy, so it was natural enough for S&A to be about how the TNG crew dealt with these situations.
 
Whoops yeah, I meant weird for a TNG Anniversary story to have such a DS9 presence, not the reprint. And I certainly understand the logic of why it was that way. I did enjoy S&A though, and a miniseries of DS9 novellas like Mere Anarchy or S&A would be very happily greeted by me.
 
Damn I was hoping Martin would have been binned as a writer - more Trek books I'll never read.
 
Brain-freeze I meant George the 3rd.

Oh god, here we go again. Why? Have you read his new one? Or are you just so stubborn because of one book? And oh yes, just because you didn't like it, he should be banned? Just banned outright because of your opinion? Too bad a lot of people loved that book, just weren't as vocal as those who were negative. Not to mention his previous Trek books, I think its been established he does a pretty successful job.
 
There are few things I can think of that would excite me more than DRG3 being heavily involved in and possible (and if there is going to be one) DS9 anniversary books next year.
 
Brain-freeze I meant George the 3rd.

Oh god, here we go again. Why? Have you read his new one? Or are you just so stubborn because of one book? And oh yes, just because you didn't like it, he should be banned? Just banned outright because of your opinion? Too bad a lot of people loved that book, just weren't as vocal as those who were negative. Not to mention his previous Trek books, I think its been established he does a pretty successful job.

Banned? No I don't like his books and think that his slots should be used by other writers but that's my personal preference. Does a dissenting view upset you in some way?

I like the Beyer's Voyager books but a lot of Voyager fans don't like them but so what? They like what they like and I like what I like, I lobby for what I want and they lobby for what they like, that's how life works - or are we all suppose to just post nice things or just speak up when we are blowing smoke up the writers' arses?
 
Brain-freeze I meant George the 3rd.

Oh god, here we go again. Why? Have you read his new one? Or are you just so stubborn because of one book? And oh yes, just because you didn't like it, he should be banned? Just banned outright because of your opinion? Too bad a lot of people loved that book, just weren't as vocal as those who were negative. Not to mention his previous Trek books, I think its been established he does a pretty successful job.

Banned? No I don't like his books and think that his slots should be used by other writers but that's my personal preference. Does a dissenting view upset you in some way?

I like the Beyer's Voyager books but a lot of Voyager fans don't like them but so what? They like what they like and I like what I like, I lobby for what I want and they lobby for what they like, that's how life works - or are we all suppose to just post nice things or just speak up when we are blowing smoke up the writers' arses?

No, but you specifically said banned in your original post. That is why I said that. You didn't just say you didn't like him. You said banned.
 
Well, you said "binned" (which I assume means trashed, thrown out), but it still conveys the same idea -- that you not only want to avoid reading him yourself, you don't want him to be allowed to write any more books, period. So the difference of a vowel doesn't really invalidate Travis's complaint.
 
I was going to use shitcanned to start with - is that preferable? Banned to me* is something that has a political and social meaning that go beyond my statement and has additional weight. Anyway, let's just settle on the fact that I think he's a shit writer and leave it at that.

* And no I don't need a lecture on what you think it means.
 
I did go back and read it. You said that you had hoped he'd been binned at this point, which I assume was a typo for banned. However, even if you meant binned, its the same thing. That he should be gone and not writing Trek books. There's nothing wrong with not liking his books. I am not a fan of Christie Golden's voyager books. Some of S.D. Perry's were not good to me. Before Dishonor did Peter David no credit. But I understand the value that others placed in them, and I would never say they should be banned or binned, which is saying they should not be allowed to write Trek books. Thats a very arrogant remark. I might not personally like their style of writing, but others do, they sold books, and people should have the right to enjoy their style. DRG3 has many people who do not like his books, and many people who do, so what I was saying was he shouldn't be banned or binned outright, but its perfectly fine for you not to like his take on the books.

And Christopher, off topic, I didn't feel like searching for the thread because I'm lazy, but I finally finished watching the clock (I know, I know) and really enjoyed it. Looking forward to starting the second DTI book.
 
Thats a very arrogant remark.

Why? If I started ranting about how I was a better writer or something equally nutty, that would be arrogant - but my personal view about a situation that in reality I don't control and don't impact? no I don't think so.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top